四分律行事鈔資持記 1.944

1.944

執《涅槃》中，敘過為二，初示正教。三世者，釋迦為現，已前為過，彌勒已後為當。然過去已滅，當來未立，安知其教！蓋諸佛道同，舉現可驗；又復現教並明過未，故可知也。但佛法仁慈，必無陵物；恒沙皆爾，豈止釋迦乎！比下，指非法。便下，斥妄引，初標破。彼經第三，因迦葉菩薩問長壽因，佛答應護眾生同於子想，迦葉白佛：若有破戒作逆毀正法者，何得皆子想？因此令以羯磨治罰，乃至云：若見比丘見壞法者，置不驅遣訶責舉處，當知是人佛法中怨等；迦葉復白佛言：如佛所言，則不等視一切眾生，同一子想，如羅睺羅；乃至佛言：譬如國王、大臣、宰相，產育諸子；若二、三、四，將付嚴師教詔；假使三子病杖而死，餘有一子，必當苦治，要令成就；乃至如來亦爾，視壞法者，等如一子。愚人執此，故行杖罰。然下，委斥，初出經意。一子地悲者，若準經中，正明如來；下引《攝論》，則通初地。即下，引經反質。即第十卷偈云：一切畏刀杖，無不愛壽命；恕己可為喻，勿殺勿行杖。不知下，責其妄引。嚴師為喻，即如上引。

In clinging to the Nirvāṇa Sūtra, the narrative of the fault divides into two. First, showing the correct teaching. "The three periods of time" means: Śākyamuni is the present, what preceded him is the past, and from Maitreya onward is the future. However, the past has already ceased and the future has not yet been established; how then can one know their teachings? It is because the path of all Buddhas is identical, so by adducing the present it can be verified; furthermore, the present teaching also clearly explains the past and future, hence it can be known. The Buddha's Dharma is benevolent and compassionate, and certainly does not mistreat living beings; this is so for all Buddhas as numerous as the sands of the Ganges—how could it be limited to Śākyamuni! From "Lately" downward, pointing out what is contrary to the Dharma. From "Then" downward, rebuking the wrongful citation, first stating the refutation. In the third fascicle of that sūtra, because Bodhisattva Kāśyapa asked about the causes of long life, the Buddha answered that one should protect sentient beings with the thought of them as an only son. Kāśyapa addressed the Buddha: If there are those who break the precepts, commit the rebellious acts, and destroy the correct Dharma, how could one regard them all as an only son? Because of this, [the Buddha] ordered that karma-procedures be used to punish them, up to saying: If a bhikṣu sees a destroyer of the Dharma and leaves him without expelling, rebuking, or formally censuring him, you should know that this person is an enemy within the Buddha's Dharma, and so forth. Kāśyapa again addressed the Buddha, saying: As the Buddha has said, then you do not view all sentient beings equally, having the same thought of them as an only son like Rāhula. Up to where the Buddha said: For example, a king, great minister, or prime minister raises many sons; if there are two, three, or four, he sends them to a strict master for instruction; even if three sons fall ill and die under the cane, for the remaining one son, [the master] will certainly discipline him harshly, insisting on bringing him to fulfillment; up to: the Tathāgata is also like this, viewing destroyers of the Dharma equally as an only son. Foolish people cling to this, and therefore administer corporal punishment with canes. From "However" downward, thoroughly rebuking [this], first bringing forth the sūtra's intended meaning. "Compassion at the stage of viewing as an only son": if according to the sūtra, it properly refers to the Tathāgata; citing the Mahāyānasaṃgraha below, it then extends to the first bhūmi. From "Namely" downward, citing the sūtra to question them in return. Namely, the verse in the tenth fascicle says: "All fear knives and canes; / None do not cherish life. / Comparing oneself can serve as a metaphor: / Do not kill, do not use the cane." From "Not knowing" downward, rebuking their wrongful citation. Using a strict master as an analogy is just as cited above.